The Message of the Song of Songs J. Paul Tanner
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
The Message of the Song of Songs
—
J. Paul Tanner
[J. Paul Tanner is Lecturer in Hebrew and Old Testament Studies, Singapore Bible College, Singapore.]
Bible students have long recognized that the Song of Songs is one of the most enigmatic books
of the entire Bible. Compounding the problem are the erotic imagery and abundance of
figurative language, characteristics that led to the allegorical interpretation of the Song that
held sway for so much of church history. Though scholarly opinion has shifted from this view,
there is still no consensus of opinion to replace the allegorical interpretation. In a previous
article this writer surveyed a variety of views and suggested that the literal-didactic approach
is better suited for a literal-grammatical-contextual hermeneutic.1 The literal-didactic view
takes the book in an essentially literal way, describing the emotional and physical relationship
between King Solomon and his Shulammite bride, while at the same time recognizing that
there is a moral lesson to be gained that goes beyond the experience of physical consummation
between the man and the woman. Laurin takes this approach in suggesting that the didactic
lesson lies in the realm of fidelity and exclusiveness within the male-female relationship.2
This article suggests a fresh interpretation of the book along the lines of the literal-didactic
approach. (This is a fresh interpretation only in the sense of making refinements on the trend
established by Laurin.) Yet the suggested alternative yields a distinctive way in which the
message of the book comes across and Solomon himself is viewed.
p.143
Reexamining the Literal Approach
A literal approach to the Song of Songs has become a popular alternative to the allegorical and
typical interpretations. Nevertheless the expression “literal approach” is a large umbrella for a
number of variant forms. For instance, one tendency is to regard the Song of Songs as an
anthology of separate love songs that have been brought together into one collection.3 This
position suffers for lack of solid evidence and also flies in the face of much evidence to the
1
J. Paul Tanner, “The History of the Interpretation of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154
(January-March 1997): 23-46.
2
Robert B. Laurin, “The Life of True Love: The Song of Songs and Its Modern Message,” Christianity
Today, August 3, 1962, 1011.
3
Representatives of the anthology view include J. G. von Herder, Lieder der Liebe (1778); W. O. E.
Oesterley, The Song of Songs (1936); H. H. Rowley, “The Interpretation of the Song of Songs,” in The
Servant of the Lord and Other Essays on the Old Testament (London: Lutterworth, 1952), 189-234;
Robert Gordis, The Song of Songs and Lamentations, rev. ed. (New York: KTAV, 1974); F. Brent
Knutson, “Canticles,” in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1 (1979), 607; George A. F.
Knight, The Song of Songs, International Theological Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988);
and John G. Snaith, The Song of Songs, New Century Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1993), 68.J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161. contrary.4 The Song reflects an attempt by a single author or editor to compose his literary piece with artistic skill and rhetorical unity (some of which this article will highlight). The opening scene in chapter 1 is interlocked with the conclusion in chapter 8 by way of the vineyard motif and the role of the brothers of the Shulammite. In her seemingly apologetic address to the “daughters of Jerusalem” (1:5–6 ), the bride attempts to explain the cause for her darkened skin: “Do not stare at me because I am swarthy, for the sun has burned me. My mother’s sons were angry with me; they made me caretaker of the vineyards, but I have not taken care of my own vineyard.” The brothers reappear in 8:8–9 in what amounts to a flashback that bears out their commitment to defend the integrity of their younger sister: “We have a little sister, and she has no breasts; what shall we do for our sister on the day when she is spoken for? If she is a wall, we shall build on her a battlement of silver; but if she is a door, we shall barricade her with planks of cedar.” In light of the sexual themes and consummation of marriage in the book, the meaning of the metaphorical language of these two verses is not difficult to determine. The focus of much of the book is on the bride as she entered into the joys of love and marriage. Verses 8–9 of chapter 8 look back to the time when she was a sexually immature young girl, implied by the reference to having “no breasts.” The brothers were contemplating the future of their young sister and the temptations that would undoubtedly come her way as she went through adolescence. The question in p.144 their minds was whether she would keep herself sexually pure until the day of her marriage. The “wall” and the “door” describe the alternative paths she might follow on her way to adulthood. A wall suggests a boundary and barrier that forbid entrance. A door on the other hand is designed for admitting others and giving access to the interior. As the guardians of family honor, the brothers wanted their sister to grow up as a “wall,” meaning that she would resist the sexual advances of her suitors and keep herself chaste. If she became a “door” (easily succumbing to advances), the brothers acknowledged that they would have to make extra effort to barricade her, so as to make sure she was not in a situation where she could easily give in to the desires of the moment. The flashback of 8:8–9 stands in contrast to 8:10 , which views the girl in her time of maturity. She said, “I was a wall, and my breasts were like towers; then I became in his eyes as one who finds peace.” Reaching sexual maturity (having advanced from “no breasts” to “breasts like towers”), she can say to her credit and to the relief of her brothers, “I was a wall.” That is, she kept her moral purity until her marriage day. She remained a chaste virgin, for which she was blessed as “one who finds peace.” While “peace” may suggest her well-being and the esteem her groom had for her, one cannot miss what appears to be a play on words in the Hebrew text. In the eyes of Solomon she is seen as one who finds
J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
acknowledgment of Solomon’s ownership, there is a careful play on the vineyard motif.
Solomon had his earthly vineyard, but metaphorically she had her vineyard, namely, her own
person and sexual love, which had been carefully guarded throughout her life. Neither
Solomon nor anyone else could “own” this, for it was hers alone to give to the one she so
desired. As the story unfolds, she willingly gave this, her most prized possession, to Solomon.
In light of the context (8:8–9 ), which speaks of the brothers’ concern for her chastity, the
reference in verse 12 to “the two hundred shekels for those who take care of the vineyard’s
fruit” is probably an acknowledgment that the brothers are due credit not only for the
p.145
care of Solomon’s literal vineyard but also for their oversight of her “vineyard” as well.5 In
their desire to protect her sexual purity they kept her engaged in the work of the vineyard to
eliminate idle time and keep her close to their careful watching eyes.
Thus the perplexing introduction to the vineyard and brothers in chapter 1 is resolved in the
final chapter, whereby the author has artistically framed his composition. This example of
literary technique serves to discount the anthology view and supports the literal-didactic
approach by underscoring the concern for the bride’s preservation of herself exclusively for
her husband.
The Physical Consummation
The most obvious feature of the Song of Songs is the sexually explicit nature of the material,
sensitively guised in figurative language. If the physical consummation of the marital
relationship were all that was involved, however, one might expect the story to conclude at the
end of chapter 4 . As many have recognized, the wedding day of Solomon (3:11 ) occupies a
lengthy and central place in the book, namely, the section from 3:6 to 5:1 . This major subunit
of the book develops in three movements:
3:6–11 The wedding day procession
4:1–15 The king’s praise for his bride
4:16–5:1 The physical consummation of the relationship
In the latter part of this unit is a play on the garden motif, in which a garden is used as a figure
for the bride’s intimate sexual love. The king exalted the bride’s virginity and her faithfulness
in keeping herself solely for him: “A garden locked is my sister, my bride, a rock-garden
locked, a spring sealed up. Your shoots are an orchard of pomegranates with choice fruits,
henna with nard plants, nard and saffron, calamus and cinnamon, with all the trees of
frankincense, myrrh and aloes, along with all the finest spices. You are a garden spring, a well
of fresh water, and streams flowing from Lebanon” (4:12–15 ).
The fruit and spices of the garden refer to the pleasures of her sexual love, but this “garden”
has been kept locked all her life—waiting for that special man who would one day be given
access. His praise and delight in her is met with a mutual response in 4:16 : “Awake, O north
wind, and come, wind of the south; make my garden breathe out fragrance, let its spices be
wafted abroad. May my beloved come into his garden and eat its choice fruits!”
p 146
5
For an alternative view that she is declaring her emancipation from her brothers, see Robert L. Alden,
“Song of Songs 8:12a: Who Said It?” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 31 (September
1988): 271-78.J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
There was no restraint on the bride’s part to ward off Solomon; he was welcome to her
“garden.” In the third play on the garden motif (5:1 ), the physical consummation is complete
and the king expressed his satisfaction: “I have come into my garden, my sister, my bride; I
have gathered my myrrh along with my balsam. I have eaten my honeycomb and my honey; I
have drunk my wine and my milk.” Then in wrapping up this section an editorial insert is
included to “legitimize,” as it were, the acceptability of this intimate exchange within the bond
of marriage: “Eat, friends; drink and imbibe deeply, O lovers” (5:1b ).
On reading 3:6–5:1 one might think this was the perfect relationship enacted in perfect
harmony. Yet the literary structure reveals that not all is ideal. This is not to suggest that there
was no exaltation of the beauty of the consummation of the two primary characters. Indeed
there was—great joy and mutual pleasure had been achieved. Two adults had made their
commitment in marriage before God and had rightfully partaken of the physical blessings.
There was no shame here, for they were encouraged to “drink and imbibe deeply.” However,
some hidden currents complicate this relationship, a problem that is reflected by the literary
structure in which the “wedding day” section is cast.
The Dream Sections: Hints of Tension
One of the interpretive theories of the Song of Songs is the “dream theory,” suggested as early
as 1813 by a Roman Catholic priest.6 To suggest that a great extent of the book is actually a
dream is going too far. Nevertheless certain smaller sections do reflect a dream. This is evident
in 3:1–5 and again in 5:2–8 , units with strikingly similar parallels. A dream in 3:1 is
suggested by the opening line, “On my bed night after night I sought him whom my soul
loves; I sought him but did not find him,” and again in 5:2 by the opening line, “I was asleep,
but my heart was awake.” That she was dreaming is also a logical conclusion inasmuch as it is
unlikely that the king’s wife would be struck and wounded by the city’s watchmen, and have
her shawl taken from her (5:7 ).
The two sections have several parallel features: (1) Each begins with a line hinting at a dream
by such terms as “bed” and “asleep.” (2) In each case the bride goes out into the city at night
searching frantically for her lover (whom she is unable to find). “I sought him but did not find
him” (3:1 ), and “I searched for him,
p.147
but I did not find him” (5:6 ). (3) In both cases she encounters watchmen of the city in her
search (3:3 ; 5:7 ). (4) Both units conclude with an adjuration to the “daughters of Jerusalem.”7
Such parallels cannot be easily dismissed as mere coincidence. What is more intriguing is the
fact that these parallel dream sections perfectly frame the wedding day unit of 3:6–5:1 . The
dream section of 3:1–5 precedes the wedding day (3:6–5:1 ), which in turn is followed by the
dream section of 5:2–8 .
However, the dream passages also include important differences. In the first dream section
(3:1–5 ) the bride eventually found the one she loves, but in the second one (5:2–8 ) she did
not. In the first one she spoke briefly with the watchmen of the city, but in the second one they
mistreated her. This would suggest that the second dream is progressive in relation to the first.
6
Johann Leonhard von Hug, Das Hohe Lied in einer noch unversuchten Deutung (Freyburg and
Constanz, 1813); and idem, Schutzschrift für seine Deutung des Hohen Liedes, und derselben weitere
Erläuterungen (Freyburg, 1816). For a more recent statement of this theory, see S. B. Freehof, “The
Song of Songs: A General Suggestion,” Jewish Quarterly Review 39 (194849): 397-402.
7
In Hebrew the initial lines of 3:5 and 5:8 are the same:J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
In the first dream some important repetitions occur. “He whom my soul loves” (yv!p=n^ hb*h&a*v#
ta@) occurs four times. The ideas of “seeking” (vqb) and “finding” (axm) each occur four
times. There is an obvious preoccupation in the dream with finding the one she loves, as
though she were fearful of losing him. This insecurity is also reflected in 3:4 by her actions
when she found him: “I held on to him and would not let him go.” This contrasts with the
second dream, in which she did not find him.
Paradoxical to her desire to be with the one whom her soul loved and the latent fears of losing
him, she seemed to precipitate the “misunderstanding” in the second dream. He came to her
bedroom chamber, but she made an excuse to avoid letting him in, in contrast to her previous
dream. The fact that her avoidance of him in her dream immediately follows the
consummation section (4:16–5:1 ) makes this even more surprising. Is there something about
their relationship that is troubling her, a worry that surfaces in her dreams? Is he responsible
for her indifference?8 The broader context of the book helps answer these questions.
Further Signs of Trouble in the Relationship
Two important clues in the book may be linked to the dreams and the apparent fears and
insecurity the bride seems to have been experiencing. One of these immediately precedes the
first dream,
[p.148]
and the other immediately follows the second dream.
The earlier hint of trouble occurs in 2:15 , “Catch the foxes for us, the little foxes that are
ruining the vineyards, while our vineyards are in blossom.” In Hebrew, there is an interesting
symmetry to these lines:J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
Most commentators agree that the request (or exhortation) pertains to the relationship of the
king and the bride, though there is no consensus as to what the concern might be. Just as foxes
were known for their destructive tendencies in crop fields, so something was troubling the love
relationship of Solomon and his bride. Delitzsch was content to let the problem remain vague
and unspecified. “The vineyards, beautiful with fragrant blossom, point to her covenant of
love; and the foxes, the little foxes, which might destroy these united vineyards, point to all the
great and little enemies and adverse circumstances which threaten to gnaw and destroy love in
the blossom, ere it has reached the ripeness of full enjoyment.”10 Deere takes the position that
the bride was asking her lover to take the initiative in solving the problems that were
potentially harmful to their relationship.11 Glickman
p.149
suggested that the “foxes” might be any number of things that posed some potentially
destructive problems for their relationship.
The foxes represent as many obstacles or temptations as have plagued lovers throughout
the centuries. Perhaps it is the fox of uncontrolled desire which drives a wedge of guilt
between a couple. Perhaps it is the fox of mistrust and jealousy which breaks the bond of
love. Or it may be the fox of selfishness and pride which refuses to let one acknowledge
his fault to another. Or it may be an unforgiving spirit which will not accept the apology
of the other.12
A problem with these suggestions is that they make no appeal to the immediate context or the
larger context of the book. On the other hand a much more obvious problem has been
precipitating from the beginning of the book. For instance in 1:3 the bride declared in regard
to the king, “Your oils have a pleasing fragrance, your name is like purified oil; therefore the
maidens love you.” Who are these maidens who love Solomon? Solomon’s bride had been
brought to the king’s “chambers” (1:4 ) and had been allowed to sit at his table (1:12 ) and
even to grace the banquet hall (2:4 ). She had been given the high honor of entering the king’s
palace. Yet she was not entirely comfortable there, for numerous women were present in the
palace who stared at her and made her feel self-conscious.13 That is why she addressed the
“daughters of Jerusalem” with the words, “Do not stare at me because I am swarthy, for the
sun has burned me” (1:6 ). These women spoke of the king in 1:4 , “We will rejoice in you and
be glad; we will extol your love more than wine.”14 Observing this situation in the palace, the
bride remarked in the final line of 1:4 , “Rightly do they love you” (i.e., these women love the
king).15 All this suggests that if the “foxes” of 2:15 mean anything in light of the preceding
context, they may refer to these “other women” who frequented Solomon’s court.
2:15 represents the words of the bride (Marvin H. Pope, Song of Songs, Anchor Bible [Garden City,
NY: Doubleday, 1977], 405).
10
Delitzsch, Commentary on the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes, 54.
11
Deere, “Song of Songs,” 1015.
12
S. Craig Glickman, A Song for Lovers (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1976), 4950.
13
Commenting on 1:56 , Knight sees a tension between the Shulammite and the women of Solomon’s
harem: It would seem that Solomon was holding a kind of beauty parade, and that SHE is hurt. At this
event SHE addresses the harem. Moreover, the harem women seem now to have second thoughts
about her. They reveal their upper-class snobbishness at the idea of a peasant girl being admitted to
their ranks (George A. F. Knight, The Song of Songs, International Theological Commentary [Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988], 12 [capital letters his]).
14
That the king is in view rather than the bride is attested by the masculine pronominal suffix on :yd#d.)
15
You is masculine singular (:Wbh@a)& .J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161. The second hint of trouble in the relationship is seen after the second dream, when the women of the court are referred to in 6:8 , p.150 “There are sixty queens [tokl*m=] and eighty concubines [
J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
the city (3:6–11 ); and citizens of Shulam (8:5 ).”21 Deere suggests that they most likely refer
to the female inhabitants of Jerusalem.22 For him, however, their function in the Song is more
significant than their identity.
The chorus is a literary device in the Song whereby the beloved and her lover express their
emotions and thoughts more fully. By praising Solomon (you is masc. sing.) in Song of Songs
1:4 the “daughters” seemed to be agreeing with one another that the couple had an ideal
romance.23
After acknowledging that the “daughters” could serve the role of a chorus who advance the
action by posing rhetorical questions or making interpretive comments on the action between
the principals, Carr seems to favor the idea that “daughters” could be used in the sense of
character (cf. 1 Sam 14:52), that is, women who display the characteristics of the city girls.24
The request to “catch the little foxes that are ruining the vineyards” signals a problem in the
relationship, and in light of 1:2–6 and 6:8–9 the most likely problem would be the tension the
bride would feel in relation to the women of Solomon’s harem. If that is so, then the
“insecurity” element of the dream sections is a reflection of her concern for their relationship
in the palace harem.
Despite the attention she received as the most recent bride, in the back of her mind was the
hopeless feeling that she could not expect to have the king all to herself. This is not one of
those stories in which the perfect couple fall in love, get married, and live happily ever after.
This is a story in which a couple fall in love, get married, and she has to adjust to the fact that
most nights of the year he will be sleeping with some other woman! Under this set of
circumstances, the health of the relationship is in dire jeopardy, a matter to which she is keenly
sensitive but he is not.
It seems that the “daughters” may well be the women numbered in 6:8–9 . The New American
Standard Bible reads:
There are sixty queens and eighty concubines,
And maidens without number;
But my dove, my perfect one, is unique:
She is her mother’s only daughter;
She is the pure child of the one who bore her.
The maidens saw her and called her blessed,
p.152
The queens and the concubines also, and they praised her, saying,…
The words in italics in the New American Standard Bible are not in Hebrew, and this reflects
the difficulty in translating these verses. Reading this, one might think that the word for
“maidens” occurs twice, but that is not so. The first occurrence of “maidens” (v. 8 ) is a
translation of toml*u&, but the second occurrence (v. 9 ) is a translation of tonb*. This latter
Hebrew word is the common word for “daughters,” and is the same word used elsewhere in
the Song in the phrase “daughters of Jerusalem.”
21
William S. LaSor, David Allan Hubbard, and F. W. Bush, Old Testament Survey (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1982), 605.
22
Deere, “Song of Songs,” 1012. He points out that the city is frequently referred to as the mother of
its inhabitants (cf. Isa 51:18; 60:4 ; Ezek 19:2, 10; Hos 2:2, 5).
23
Ibid.
24
Carr, The Song of Songs, 77.J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161. In verse 9 the initial verb, h*War* (“saw her”), does double duty for both lines. The other verbs, h*WrV=a^y=w^ (“called her blessed”) and h*Wll=h^y=w^ (“praised her”), each of which concludes a colon, are lexically similar (terms of praise and blessing) and are parallel. The result is that tonb* (“daughters”) is precisely parallel with “queens” and “concubines.” Thus these two primary terms for the harem are the “daughters” (tonb*). This suggests that the expression “daughters of Jerusalem” throughout the Song is a summarizing term for the women of the harem, whether they are tokl*m= (“queens”),
J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
Exum Shea
A 1:2–2:6 A 1:2–2:2
B 2:7–3:5 B 2:3–17
C 3:6–5:1 C 3:1–4:16
B’ 5:2–6:3 C’ 5:1–7:10
C’ 6:4–8:3 B’ 7:11–8:5
A’ 8:4–14 A’ 8:6–14
Webster Dorsey
A 1:2–2:6 A 1:2–2:7
2:7–3:5 B 2:8–17
B Interlude 3:6–11 C 3:1–5
4:1–7 D 3:6–5:1
4:8–15 C’ 5:2–7:10
C 4:16–6:3 B’ 7:11–8:4
B’ 6:4–10 A’ 8:5–14
6:11–7:10
A’ 7:11–8:3
8:4–14
Though space does not permit a detailed analysis of these findings, there is an inherent danger
in rhetorical criticism
p.154
forcing a pattern in an attempt to deduce an overall scheme. Dorsey, for instance, argues for a
composition of seven units with the first and final units consisting of seven subunits. In doing
so, however, he must argue that 8:5b is a subunit distinct from 8:5a and 8:6–7.28 He
concludes that Solomon is speaking in 8:5b and the bride is speaking in 8:6–7 , but
grammatically this conclusion is problematic, because 8:5b begins with the line “Beneath the
apple tree I awakened you.” The pronoun “you” in English translations is in Hebrew
masculine - not feminine (:yT!r=r^ou). In other words the bride is speaking to Solomon, and thus
verses 8:5b–7 are one unit, not two. Dorsey has noted this, but to make his case, he has to opt
for a Syriac reading that supports a feminine suffix. Were it not for his quest to have seven
subunits to this last section, this text critical option would probably not have been proposed.
While the book has numerous repetitions of words and key phrases, inclusios, and parallels,
the difficulty is in knowing how much to make of the macrostructure. For instance several
scholars have noticed parallels of the first section (1:1–2:7 ) with the final section of the book
(8:5–14 ). However, one could also say that the second major section (2:8–17 ) has observable
parallels with the last as well. Song of Songs 2:8 begins with an announcement of the lover’s
coming: “Listen! My beloved! Behold, he is coming,” which has some similarity to 8:5 ,
“Who is this coming up from the wilderness, leaning on her beloved?” And 2:17 (which ends
the second section) contains the line, “Turn, my beloved, and be like a gazelle or a young
stag,” and the final section concludes in similar fashion: “Hurry, my beloved, and be like a
gazelle or a young stag” (8:14 ).
Although the nature of the macrostructure is difficult to ascertain, the rhetorical elements are
helpful in delineating the major units of the book. The following paragraphs discuss some of
these features.
28
Dorsey, Literary Structuring in the Song of Songs, 91.J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
1:2-2:7
Dorsey admirably demonstrates the sevenfold chiastic structure of this section,29 in which a
longer speech by the bride frames the entire unit.
1. Young woman’s long speech expressing her desire to be with her lover in his home
(1:2–7 )
a. Aside to the “daughters of Jerusalem”
b. “He has brought me into his chambers”
p.155
c. Theme-word: “love”
d. Mention of “wine” (1:2, 4 )
7. Young woman’s long speech expressing her desire to be with her lover in his home
(2:3–7 )
a. Aside to the “daughters of Jerusalem”
b. “He has brought me into the house of wine”
c. Theme-word: “love”
d. Mention of “wine” (2:4 )30
2:8-17
This section is composed of three subunits. The bride speaks in 2:8–9 , Solomon speaks in
2:10–14 , and the bride speaks again in 2:15–17 . Also there are several word repetitions in
these subunits that serve to frame the entire section: “my beloved” (yd!oD), “gazelle” (yb!x=),
“young stag,” (J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
4:1, “How beautiful you are, my darling”
4:7, “You are altogether beautiful, my darling”
4:8, “Come with me from Lebanon, my bride”
4:11, “The fragrance of your garments is like the fragrance of Lebanon”
p.156
4:12, “A garden locked is my sister, my bride…a spring sealed up.”
4:15, “You are a garden spring.”
5:9-6:13
Though scholars disagree on where the section following the wedding begins and ends, 5:8
may end the dream section, with a new section beginning in 5:9 . Just as the first dream
section ended with an “adjuration” for the “daughters of Jerusalem” (3:5 ), a similar address
concludes the second dream section (5:8 ). Furthermore 5:9–6:13 includes several questions
and responses, reflecting an uncomfortable interaction between the bride and the “daughters of
Jerusalem.”
5:9 Question: The “daughters of Jerusalem” ask, “What kind of beloved is your
beloved?”
5:10–16 Response: The bride praises the beauty and desirability of Solomon.
6:1 Question: The “daughters of Jerusalem” ask, “Where has your beloved
gone…that we may seek him with you?”
6:2–3 Response: The bride says he has gone to his garden to pasture his flocks and
gather lilies.
6:4–9 Solomon: He praises the bride (“as awesome as an army with banners”),
but attention is called to the other women.
6:10 Question: The “daughters” (presumably) ask, “Who is this that grows like
the dawn,…as awesome as an army with banners?”
6:11–12 Response: The bride (?) leaves for the orchard in the valley.
6:13 Conclusion: The “daughters” are calling for her to come back, but apparently
Solomon gently rebukes them (which ends the interaction
between the bride and the “daughters”).
7:1-8:4
The material in 7:1–8:4 consists primarily of dialogue between the bride and Solomon. In
7:1–9a , Solomon praises her beauty, and in 7:9b–8:2 she responds by expressing her desire
for him. The section concludes in 8:3–4 with her wish for his embrace followed by an
admonition to the “daughters of Jerusalem.” This
p.157
section of 7:1–8:4 is strikingly similar to the conclusion of the first major section (1:2–2:7 ).
2:6 “Let his left hand be 8:3 “Let his left hand be under my head
under my head and his and his right hand embrace me.”
right hand embrace me.”
2:7 “I adjure you, O daughters 8:4 “I want you to swear, O daughtersJ. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
of Jerusalem, by the of Jerusalem,
gazelles or by the hinds
of the field,
that you will not arouse Do not arouse or awaken my love,
or awaken my love,
until she pleases.” until she pleases.”
8:5-14
The question in 8:5 , “Who is this coming up from the wilderness, leaning on her beloved?”
signals the beginning of the last section. This is similar to the question that initiated the
wedding section in 3:6 : “Who is this coming up from the wilderness like columns of
smoke?”31
Based on these observations, an overall structure emerges which corresponds to the
chronological development of the relationship. The section 3:6–5:1 reports the wedding day
and physical consummation of the relationship. Section 1:2–3:5 depicts the prewedding
phase, and 5:2–8:4 depicts the postwedding complications. This leaves 8:5–14 , which stands
as the conclusion to the book and holds the key to the book’s message.
The Conclusion to the Book (8:5-14 )
The conclusion begins with a rhetorical refrain reminiscent of the one that opened the wedding
section: “Who is this coming up from the wilderness, leaning on her beloved?” Following this
question is a homily provided by the bride in 8:5b–7 . Of the ten verses in the conclusion
section, only one of them is clearly spoken by Solomon, namely, verse 13 . Most of the verses
in the
p.158
conclusion are spoken by the bride, and even the contribution of the “brothers” (vv. 8–9 ) is
probably her reflection of their superintendence over her life. If the bulk of the conclusion to
the book comes from the bride, and if she is the one who provides the moral lesson, then more
of the book should be seen through her eyes.32
The moral lesson from the bride is aimed first at Solomon. In 8:6 , she pleads, “Put me like a
seal over your heart, like a seal on your arm.” The word “seal” (J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161. ring [
J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161.
and faithful wife, but Solomon ultimately had seven hundred wives and three hundred
concubines (1 Kings 11:3). No wonder she, not he, delivers the moral lesson of the book. He
was totally unqualified to speak on the issue of godly dedicated love. He knew the physical
side of it, but apparently he did not know the love she cherished.
Once this inherent tension within the book is recognized, many of the details begin to make
sense. She longs for him, but she longs to have him alone (without the threatening intimidation
of others in Solomon’s harem). Solomon was mutually infatuated
p.160
with her, but he was blinded from seeing the possibility of an exclusive relationship. Hence he
exclaimed in 2:2 , “Like a lily among the thorns, so is my darling among the maidens” (lit.,
“daughters”).
The word “vineyard” speaks at times of Solomon’s literal vineyards, but at other times it
suggests the love Solomon and the bride experienced. Cognizant of her female rivals, the bride
hinted in the earlier stages of their relationship, “Catch the foxes for us, the little foxes that are
ruining the vineyards, while our vineyards are in blossom” (2:15 ). This problem comes to the
fore immediately after the marriage, and this is the reason (in light of the broader context of
the book) for the bride’s cool response in the second dream section (5:2–8 ). She truly loves
him, but the continuance of this arrangement is emotionally crippling to her, and she suffers
from a wounded spirit. Rightfully she wants him all for herself, which explains her fondness
for saying, “I am my beloved’s and his desire is for me” (7:10 ; cf. 2:16 ; 6:3 ). If she could
have her way, they would run off to the country and relish in their love without the
complications of palace life (7:11–8:2 ).
Conclusion and Implications
Solomon was a man of many lovers, and the Song of Songs is a record of one of the
relationships that stood out above all others. A fiery love developed between Solomon and the
unnamed Shulammite woman referred to as the bride. Their background was remarkably
diverse. He grew up in the kingly courts of Jerusalem, while she was accustomed to labor in
the vineyards beneath the blistering sun.35 He had known many women (nor had his father
David been monogamous), whereas she had been kept a virgin under the careful scrutiny of
her brothers.
Solomon could offer her a life in the royal courts, but she had something much greater to offer
him. She could teach him about a godly love based on commitment, a love that needed to be
mutually exclusive to experience its highest attainment. Such love was costly (8:7 ). It was
more than money could buy, more than even Solomon was capable of. So, she becomes the
heroine of the book, and she (rather than Solomon) renders the moral homily in the book’s
conclusion.
Unfortunately Solomon followed the way of many worldly kings, establishing a large harem to
propagate a large royal
p.161
lineage. As a result too many women - the “daughters of Jerusalem” - were vying for his
attention. She made an earnest attempt to love him in such a context, but she knew there was a
35
In light of the statement in 7:1 , she did not necessarily have an impoverished background. Victor
Sasson suggests that the darkened lady of 1:56 is a poetic reference to Pharaohs daughter (”King
Solomon and the Dark Lady in the Song of Songs,” Vetus Testamentum 39 [October 1989]: 407-14).J. Paul Tanner, “The Message of the Song of Songs,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154: 613 (1997): 142-161. higher level to which their relationship could ascend if only they could be exclusively each other’s. That is what led her to request, “Put me like a seal over your heart” (8:6 ). The development of her life had been one of moral purity, retaining her virginity for the exclusive satisfaction of the one who would become her husband. She was prepared to be exclusively his. He, however, had a great obstacle to overcome. He needed to recognize the detrimental effect his lifestyle imposed on the development of their relationship. In this literal-didactic view, the relationship of Solomon and his bride should be understood literally (speaking approvingly of their marital bliss), but it also presents an important lesson: There is a level of love far beyond sexual satisfaction, a love that is exclusive and possessive, having no room for intruders. Only two may ascend alone, but in so doing they will find that “its flashes are flashes of fire, the very flame of the Lord” (8:6 ). The Song of Songs hearkens back to God’s prototypical design in the Garden of Eden of one man and one woman, in marriage, a relationship God designed to be mutually exclusive. This book, then, presents a most relevant and urgent message for today. © 1997 Dallas Theological Seminary. Reproduced by Permission. Converted to PDF by Robert I. Bradshaw, March 2004. http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/
You can also read
